|
On October 17 2013 06:57 Vanadiel wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 05:36 TheDwf wrote:On October 17 2013 04:12 Big J wrote:
I'm gonna bring up my eternal rant about marines being the reason why other Terran stuff cannot be as good (=/= being too strong) for as long as you bring up your eternal rant about patch 1.4.3.2. Except my "rant" makes sense as the statistics of the Marine were left unchanged since beta, while the Queen patch had notable consequences on the way the whole match-up is played. But keep fooling yourself thinking the only significant consequence of Queen range 5 was the death of double Reactor Hellion all-ins and other stuff like that. Was writing a lot of other stuff but deleted it, because it's completely useless to discuss "what would be with 3range queens". Noone knows. Indeed. No one knows how SC2 would look like had it followed its "natural" course because patches, patches, patches. PS: And roach/hydra gets torn apart by Marine/Medivac play outside of a 1-1 or 2-2 timing. Or why do you think noone plays it? Because of mines? Get real, mineheavy play was the only reason why those builds were somewhat efficient at the start of HotS. Roaches/Hydras does not get "torn apart by Marine/Medivac play," you need either 6+ Tanks or ~15+ Marauders with 10+ Medivacs if you go pure bio before the Terran army becomes stronger/unbeatable. Naturally, you have none of those things when the timings hit. Even for a less timing-oriented style, nothing prevents Zerg from scouting with an Overseer if Terran goes Tanks as a reaction, and consequently rushing Hive to gets Vipers before Terran has too many Tanks for the Roach/Hydra army to handle, etc. The fact Tefel can be competitive against Mvp despite the massive skill gap between them says something about the style. The fact that no one won with this build as a standard in ZvT and no one does it anymore , tells even more about the style.
Wut?
Mvp vs Tefel, Newkirk, WCS Europe Season 2
ForGG vs Nerchio, Derelict Watcher, WCS Europe Season 3
jjakji vs Minimath, Polar Night, ATC Qualifiers
GuMiho vs DRG, Polar Night, Code S
Mvp vs LiveZerg, Derelict Watcher, Igromir [Terran wins, but just another example to show that your "no one does it anymore" claim is wrong].
Roaches/Hydras is far from being standard, but it's stronger than what Zergs say, and the last 4 games mentioned are all recent.
|
On October 17 2013 07:03 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 07:01 Qwyn wrote:On October 17 2013 06:36 Ghanburighan wrote:I really like this idea: On October 17 2013 01:59 _indigo_ wrote:
I honestly think Terran should get something done with the Bunker upgrade, since the upgrade is on engineering bay where there are already some of the most important upgrades in the game.
Are we really supposed to upgrade bunker to 6 slots @ 25 min when we have 3-3 done? I think Neosteel upgrade (for 6 slots) should be an orbital drop that uses energy just like mules and scan. To balance the bunker rush with neosteel drop you would, for example, need to build engineering bay first to unlock the neosteel drop.
What do terrans and non-terrans think about this? Should this upgrade increase bunker HP as well maybe? If an engineering bay is required, it cannot be used for bunker rushes. If the energy cost is 100, it cannot be used in all situations, and it's unlikely to be possible without 3 CC. But it would add a "I scouted a roach bust, let me get a neosteel bunker or 2." Don't know if it would actually help you hold it, though. As the HP of the bunker remain the same... On the other hand, you could also use the drop to a) increase planetary SCV capacity by 5. I wonder if SCV's can repair from inside the planetary... Anyone ever tested this? Conclusion: it's a very elegant solution to a problem that probably doesn't exist. Rather than doing a change like that (which is situational at most!) seeing more terran players get such an upgrade would be cute. But what is the benefit of 6 marines over 4 against counterattacks? That's two more supply sitting static that is probably going to get blown up by banelings anyway ^^. It's more about careful management of your base defenses than a bunker change ^^. As you said, ahaha, "elegant change to a problem that doesn't exist." I much prefer if Planetaries got their own spells "Neosteel Drop," "Point Tracking Drop," "+2 armor drop"
Better yet, they have the energy to do the +2 armor drop immediately after completion ^^.
I'm going to play on the test map - see just how much the mine nerf changes parade pushes. Siege tank buff best for mech, I suppose!
|
On October 17 2013 07:21 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 07:03 Thieving Magpie wrote:On October 17 2013 07:01 Qwyn wrote:On October 17 2013 06:36 Ghanburighan wrote:I really like this idea: On October 17 2013 01:59 _indigo_ wrote:
I honestly think Terran should get something done with the Bunker upgrade, since the upgrade is on engineering bay where there are already some of the most important upgrades in the game.
Are we really supposed to upgrade bunker to 6 slots @ 25 min when we have 3-3 done? I think Neosteel upgrade (for 6 slots) should be an orbital drop that uses energy just like mules and scan. To balance the bunker rush with neosteel drop you would, for example, need to build engineering bay first to unlock the neosteel drop.
What do terrans and non-terrans think about this? Should this upgrade increase bunker HP as well maybe? If an engineering bay is required, it cannot be used for bunker rushes. If the energy cost is 100, it cannot be used in all situations, and it's unlikely to be possible without 3 CC. But it would add a "I scouted a roach bust, let me get a neosteel bunker or 2." Don't know if it would actually help you hold it, though. As the HP of the bunker remain the same... On the other hand, you could also use the drop to a) increase planetary SCV capacity by 5. I wonder if SCV's can repair from inside the planetary... Anyone ever tested this? Conclusion: it's a very elegant solution to a problem that probably doesn't exist. Rather than doing a change like that (which is situational at most!) seeing more terran players get such an upgrade would be cute. But what is the benefit of 6 marines over 4 against counterattacks? That's two more supply sitting static that is probably going to get blown up by banelings anyway ^^. It's more about careful management of your base defenses than a bunker change ^^. As you said, ahaha, "elegant change to a problem that doesn't exist." I much prefer if Planetaries got their own spells "Neosteel Drop," "Point Tracking Drop," "+2 armor drop" Better yet, they have the energy to do the +2 armor drop immediately after completion ^^. I'm going to play on the test map - see just how much the mine nerf changes parade pushes. Siege tank buff best for mech, I suppose!
Even better, let it stack  lol >
|
On October 17 2013 05:36 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 04:12 Big J wrote:
I'm gonna bring up my eternal rant about marines being the reason why other Terran stuff cannot be as good (=/= being too strong) for as long as you bring up your eternal rant about patch 1.4.3.2. Except my "rant" makes sense as the statistics of the Marine were left unchanged since beta, while the Queen patch had notable consequences on the way the whole match-up is played. But keep fooling yourself thinking the only significant consequence of Queen range 5 was the death of double Reactor Hellion all-ins and other stuff like that. Just want to point out that TvZ actually became slightly more T favored the month after the range patch. While obviously a month's worth of statistics isn't a whole lot to go on, it at least lends credence to the possibility that the resulting strategic shift after the queen patch had more to do with it than the changes on the queen itself. I'd be curious to see whether the Z vs. T early game would play out that much differently right now if the queen range were suddenly reverted.
Also, as a side note, queen range increase DRASTICALLY improved the ZvZ matchup. Made the early game much more stable.
|
On October 17 2013 07:16 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:57 Vanadiel wrote:On October 17 2013 05:36 TheDwf wrote:On October 17 2013 04:12 Big J wrote:
I'm gonna bring up my eternal rant about marines being the reason why other Terran stuff cannot be as good (=/= being too strong) for as long as you bring up your eternal rant about patch 1.4.3.2. Except my "rant" makes sense as the statistics of the Marine were left unchanged since beta, while the Queen patch had notable consequences on the way the whole match-up is played. But keep fooling yourself thinking the only significant consequence of Queen range 5 was the death of double Reactor Hellion all-ins and other stuff like that. Was writing a lot of other stuff but deleted it, because it's completely useless to discuss "what would be with 3range queens". Noone knows. Indeed. No one knows how SC2 would look like had it followed its "natural" course because patches, patches, patches. PS: And roach/hydra gets torn apart by Marine/Medivac play outside of a 1-1 or 2-2 timing. Or why do you think noone plays it? Because of mines? Get real, mineheavy play was the only reason why those builds were somewhat efficient at the start of HotS. Roaches/Hydras does not get "torn apart by Marine/Medivac play," you need either 6+ Tanks or ~15+ Marauders with 10+ Medivacs if you go pure bio before the Terran army becomes stronger/unbeatable. Naturally, you have none of those things when the timings hit. Even for a less timing-oriented style, nothing prevents Zerg from scouting with an Overseer if Terran goes Tanks as a reaction, and consequently rushing Hive to gets Vipers before Terran has too many Tanks for the Roach/Hydra army to handle, etc. The fact Tefel can be competitive against Mvp despite the massive skill gap between them says something about the style. The fact that no one won with this build as a standard in ZvT and no one does it anymore , tells even more about the style. Wut? Mvp vs Tefel, Newkirk, WCS Europe Season 2 ForGG vs Nerchio, Derelict Watcher, WCS Europe Season 3 jjakji vs Minimath, Polar Night, ATC Qualifiers GuMiho vs DRG, Polar Night, Code S Mvp vs LiveZerg, Derelict Watcher, Igromir [Terran wins, but just another example to show that your "no one does it anymore" claim is wrong]. Roaches/Hydras is far from being standard, but it's stronger than what Zergs say, and the last 4 games mentioned are all recent.
While it's used rarely, it's still pretty bad. Only time I ever see it work is when terran doesn't realize it's happening until to late. A good terran can abuse it so bad with drops and correct unit composition.
|
On October 15 2013 02:38 a176 wrote:
All these random balance changes, most of them he doesn't even go through with, it seems like David Kim doesn't have a fucking clue what to do with this game anymore.
Reminds me of my work. No long term plans, fly by the seat of their pants, whatever sounds good that day goes...
Blizzard does not at all appear to have a long term plan for SC2. They certainly didn't with HOTS (let's add these awesome units called the Shedder, the Warhound and the Replicant!)... whichever way the wind blows is where SC2 goes...
|
On October 17 2013 12:51 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2013 02:38 a176 wrote:
All these random balance changes, most of them he doesn't even go through with, it seems like David Kim doesn't have a fucking clue what to do with this game anymore. Reminds me of my work. No long term plans, fly by the seat of their pants, whatever sounds good that day goes... Blizzard does not at all appear to have a long term plan for SC2. They certainly didn't with HOTS (let's add these awesome units called the Shedder, the Warhound and the Replicant!)... whichever way the wind blows is where SC2 goes...
The warhound not making it into the game was the best part of HotS development.
|
On October 17 2013 13:00 iaguz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 12:51 BronzeKnee wrote:On October 15 2013 02:38 a176 wrote:
All these random balance changes, most of them he doesn't even go through with, it seems like David Kim doesn't have a fucking clue what to do with this game anymore. Reminds me of my work. No long term plans, fly by the seat of their pants, whatever sounds good that day goes... Blizzard does not at all appear to have a long term plan for SC2. They certainly didn't with HOTS (let's add these awesome units called the Shedder, the Warhound and the Replicant!)... whichever way the wind blows is where SC2 goes... The warhound not making it into the game was the best part of HotS development.
The original warhound (a halved thor) not making it into the game was the worst part of HOTS development. The later warhound (a mech marauder) not making it into the game was the best part of HOTS development.
Still to this day I dont know why they didn't go forward with their original idea or replacing the thor with something thats more accessible and less clunky and out of no where they decided that mech needed a super marauder in disguise.
|
On October 17 2013 13:58 YyapSsap wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 13:00 iaguz wrote:On October 17 2013 12:51 BronzeKnee wrote:On October 15 2013 02:38 a176 wrote:
All these random balance changes, most of them he doesn't even go through with, it seems like David Kim doesn't have a fucking clue what to do with this game anymore. Reminds me of my work. No long term plans, fly by the seat of their pants, whatever sounds good that day goes... Blizzard does not at all appear to have a long term plan for SC2. They certainly didn't with HOTS (let's add these awesome units called the Shedder, the Warhound and the Replicant!)... whichever way the wind blows is where SC2 goes... The warhound not making it into the game was the best part of HotS development. The original warhound (a halved thor) not making it into the game was the worst part of HOTS development. The later warhound (a mech marauder) not making it into the game was the best part of HOTS development. Still to this day I dont know why they didn't go forward with their original idea or replacing the thor with something thats more accessible and less clunky and out of no where they decided that mech needed a super marauder in disguise.
My educated guess is that they felt uncomfortable with making the thor into another Mothership-style unit, when they had already planned on making the actual mothership into a goldleague roflship.
Something needed to fill the role of "shit that a-moves tanks" that every other race had, so they left the Thor as-is for anti-air, and reshaped the Warhound to fill their needs.
|
On October 17 2013 05:36 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 04:12 Big J wrote:
I'm gonna bring up my eternal rant about marines being the reason why other Terran stuff cannot be as good (=/= being too strong) for as long as you bring up your eternal rant about patch 1.4.3.2. Except my "rant" makes sense as the statistics of the Marine were left unchanged since beta, while the Queen patch had notable consequences on the way the whole match-up is played. But keep fooling yourself thinking the only significant consequence of Queen range 5 was the death of double Reactor Hellion all-ins and other stuff like that. Show nested quote +Was writing a lot of other stuff but deleted it, because it's completely useless to discuss "what would be with 3range queens". Noone knows. Indeed. No one knows how SC2 would look like had it followed its "natural" course because patches, patches, patches.
Exactly. The marine got left untouched, despite Marine based strategies being the most used Terran strategies since the beta. While other strategies - like tankbased ones - are not viable currently, because those things were nerfed down so that tanks can't easily counter everything that's needed against marines.
I believe it would have been better for the game if marines had gotten nerfed a tiny bit early on, instead of tanks for example. Like have Terran being forced to go for (stronger than now) tanks/ghosts in the midgame and marines as mineraldump, instead of "the unit you want to build".
Show nested quote +PS: And roach/hydra gets torn apart by Marine/Medivac play outside of a 1-1 or 2-2 timing. Or why do you think noone plays it? Because of mines? Get real, mineheavy play was the only reason why those builds were somewhat efficient at the start of HotS. Roaches/Hydras does not get "torn apart by Marine/Medivac play," you need either 6+ Tanks or ~15+ Marauders with 10+ Medivacs if you go pure bio before the Terran army becomes stronger/unbeatable. Naturally, you have none of those things when the timings hit. Even for a less timing-oriented style, nothing prevents Zerg from scouting with an Overseer if Terran goes Tanks as a reaction, and consequently rushing Hive to gets Vipers before Terran has too many Tanks for the Roach/Hydra army to handle, etc. The fact Tefel can be competitive against Mvp despite the massive skill gap between them says something about the style.
Sorry, that's so double standards from somebody who claims that nothing is viable for Terran against Zerg apart from bio/mine. We see much more Mech and bio/tank play than roach/hydra play.
Yet you claim roach/hydra is viable but Mech and bio/tank is not...
On October 17 2013 05:42 CakeSauc3 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 04:12 Big J wrote:
Was writing a lot of other stuff but deleted it, because it's completely useless to discuss "what would be with 3range queens". Noone knows.
What we do know is that SC2 was a lot more entertaining to watch and play when queens only had a range of 3. Do we need to know anything more than that?
The best games of WoL happened in 2012/2013, so not really.
|
On October 17 2013 05:42 CakeSauc3 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 04:12 Big J wrote:
Was writing a lot of other stuff but deleted it, because it's completely useless to discuss "what would be with 3range queens". Noone knows.
What we do know is that SC2 was a lot more entertaining to watch and play when queens only had a range of 3. Do we need to know anything more than that?
if you were into roach ling baneling all in vs Terran getting third up faster than zerg/at least 6 kinds of difficult to scout all ins.
then I guess you can say it was more entertaining lol
|
On October 17 2013 13:58 YyapSsap wrote:
Still to this day I dont know why they didn't go forward with their original idea or replacing the thor with something thats more accessible and less clunky and out of no where they decided that mech needed a super marauder in disguise.
Because they wanted mech TvP to happen and it was clear that without mech counter to stalker/immortal it cannot work.
That better anti-air role was supposed to be filled with mines.
|
On October 17 2013 07:16 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:57 Vanadiel wrote:On October 17 2013 05:36 TheDwf wrote:On October 17 2013 04:12 Big J wrote:
I'm gonna bring up my eternal rant about marines being the reason why other Terran stuff cannot be as good (=/= being too strong) for as long as you bring up your eternal rant about patch 1.4.3.2. Except my "rant" makes sense as the statistics of the Marine were left unchanged since beta, while the Queen patch had notable consequences on the way the whole match-up is played. But keep fooling yourself thinking the only significant consequence of Queen range 5 was the death of double Reactor Hellion all-ins and other stuff like that. Was writing a lot of other stuff but deleted it, because it's completely useless to discuss "what would be with 3range queens". Noone knows. Indeed. No one knows how SC2 would look like had it followed its "natural" course because patches, patches, patches. PS: And roach/hydra gets torn apart by Marine/Medivac play outside of a 1-1 or 2-2 timing. Or why do you think noone plays it? Because of mines? Get real, mineheavy play was the only reason why those builds were somewhat efficient at the start of HotS. Roaches/Hydras does not get "torn apart by Marine/Medivac play," you need either 6+ Tanks or ~15+ Marauders with 10+ Medivacs if you go pure bio before the Terran army becomes stronger/unbeatable. Naturally, you have none of those things when the timings hit. Even for a less timing-oriented style, nothing prevents Zerg from scouting with an Overseer if Terran goes Tanks as a reaction, and consequently rushing Hive to gets Vipers before Terran has too many Tanks for the Roach/Hydra army to handle, etc. The fact Tefel can be competitive against Mvp despite the massive skill gap between them says something about the style. The fact that no one won with this build as a standard in ZvT and no one does it anymore , tells even more about the style. Wut? Mvp vs Tefel, Newkirk, WCS Europe Season 2 ForGG vs Nerchio, Derelict Watcher, WCS Europe Season 3 jjakji vs Minimath, Polar Night, ATC Qualifiers GuMiho vs DRG, Polar Night, Code S Mvp vs LiveZerg, Derelict Watcher, Igromir [Terran wins, but just another example to show that your "no one does it anymore" claim is wrong]. Roaches/Hydras is far from being standard, but it's stronger than what Zergs say, and the last 4 games mentioned are all recent.
As a standard build. No one is gonna made roach hydra most of ZvT. It's an okay build on some maps, on some occasion and against some opponent because no one expect it anymore (and for a good reason), that you can throw at your opponent to say "hey, look at me, I don't always do the same build". It's like saying mech is legit because flash or Gumiho won some game with it.
|
On October 17 2013 14:35 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 05:36 TheDwf wrote:On October 17 2013 04:12 Big J wrote:
I'm gonna bring up my eternal rant about marines being the reason why other Terran stuff cannot be as good (=/= being too strong) for as long as you bring up your eternal rant about patch 1.4.3.2. Except my "rant" makes sense as the statistics of the Marine were left unchanged since beta, while the Queen patch had notable consequences on the way the whole match-up is played. But keep fooling yourself thinking the only significant consequence of Queen range 5 was the death of double Reactor Hellion all-ins and other stuff like that. Was writing a lot of other stuff but deleted it, because it's completely useless to discuss "what would be with 3range queens". Noone knows. Indeed. No one knows how SC2 would look like had it followed its "natural" course because patches, patches, patches. Exactly. The marine got left untouched, despite Marine based strategies being the most used Terran strategies since the beta. While other strategies - like tankbased ones - are not viable currently, because those things were nerfed down so that tanks can't easily counter everything that's needed against marines. I believe it would have been better for the game if marines had gotten nerfed a tiny bit early on, instead of tanks for example. Like have Terran being forced to go for (stronger than now) tanks/ghosts in the midgame and marines as mineraldump, instead of "the unit you want to build". Show nested quote +PS: And roach/hydra gets torn apart by Marine/Medivac play outside of a 1-1 or 2-2 timing. Or why do you think noone plays it? Because of mines? Get real, mineheavy play was the only reason why those builds were somewhat efficient at the start of HotS. Roaches/Hydras does not get "torn apart by Marine/Medivac play," you need either 6+ Tanks or ~15+ Marauders with 10+ Medivacs if you go pure bio before the Terran army becomes stronger/unbeatable. Naturally, you have none of those things when the timings hit. Even for a less timing-oriented style, nothing prevents Zerg from scouting with an Overseer if Terran goes Tanks as a reaction, and consequently rushing Hive to gets Vipers before Terran has too many Tanks for the Roach/Hydra army to handle, etc. The fact Tefel can be competitive against Mvp despite the massive skill gap between them says something about the style. Sorry, that's so double standards from somebody who claims that nothing is viable for Terran against Zerg apart from bio/mine. We see much more Mech and bio/tank play than roach/hydra play. Yet you claim roach/hydra is viable but Mech and bio/tank is not... Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 05:42 CakeSauc3 wrote:On October 17 2013 04:12 Big J wrote:
Was writing a lot of other stuff but deleted it, because it's completely useless to discuss "what would be with 3range queens". Noone knows.
What we do know is that SC2 was a lot more entertaining to watch and play when queens only had a range of 3. Do we need to know anything more than that? The best games of WoL happened in 2012/2013, so not really.
Kas is the only one that does Marine/Tank
Flash is one of the most prominant meching players.
Who else? Give games, don't just say stuff.
|
I, for one, is actually positive about the way Sc2 is going, a lot better than it was years ago, imo.
|
On October 17 2013 17:48 sM.Zik wrote:
I, for one, is actually positive about the way Sc2 is going, a lot better than it was years ago, imo.
This. Cut Blizzard some damn slack, if you have made outstanding products in the past and now newer things don't seem as brilliant anymore for people Blizzard suddenly sucks...
Even though they made some terrible mistakes they tend to still do a superb job.
|
On October 17 2013 17:43 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 14:35 Big J wrote:On October 17 2013 05:36 TheDwf wrote:On October 17 2013 04:12 Big J wrote:
I'm gonna bring up my eternal rant about marines being the reason why other Terran stuff cannot be as good (=/= being too strong) for as long as you bring up your eternal rant about patch 1.4.3.2. Except my "rant" makes sense as the statistics of the Marine were left unchanged since beta, while the Queen patch had notable consequences on the way the whole match-up is played. But keep fooling yourself thinking the only significant consequence of Queen range 5 was the death of double Reactor Hellion all-ins and other stuff like that. Was writing a lot of other stuff but deleted it, because it's completely useless to discuss "what would be with 3range queens". Noone knows. Indeed. No one knows how SC2 would look like had it followed its "natural" course because patches, patches, patches. Exactly. The marine got left untouched, despite Marine based strategies being the most used Terran strategies since the beta. While other strategies - like tankbased ones - are not viable currently, because those things were nerfed down so that tanks can't easily counter everything that's needed against marines. I believe it would have been better for the game if marines had gotten nerfed a tiny bit early on, instead of tanks for example. Like have Terran being forced to go for (stronger than now) tanks/ghosts in the midgame and marines as mineraldump, instead of "the unit you want to build". PS: And roach/hydra gets torn apart by Marine/Medivac play outside of a 1-1 or 2-2 timing. Or why do you think noone plays it? Because of mines? Get real, mineheavy play was the only reason why those builds were somewhat efficient at the start of HotS. Roaches/Hydras does not get "torn apart by Marine/Medivac play," you need either 6+ Tanks or ~15+ Marauders with 10+ Medivacs if you go pure bio before the Terran army becomes stronger/unbeatable. Naturally, you have none of those things when the timings hit. Even for a less timing-oriented style, nothing prevents Zerg from scouting with an Overseer if Terran goes Tanks as a reaction, and consequently rushing Hive to gets Vipers before Terran has too many Tanks for the Roach/Hydra army to handle, etc. The fact Tefel can be competitive against Mvp despite the massive skill gap between them says something about the style. Sorry, that's so double standards from somebody who claims that nothing is viable for Terran against Zerg apart from bio/mine. We see much more Mech and bio/tank play than roach/hydra play. Yet you claim roach/hydra is viable but Mech and bio/tank is not... On October 17 2013 05:42 CakeSauc3 wrote:On October 17 2013 04:12 Big J wrote:
Was writing a lot of other stuff but deleted it, because it's completely useless to discuss "what would be with 3range queens". Noone knows.
What we do know is that SC2 was a lot more entertaining to watch and play when queens only had a range of 3. Do we need to know anything more than that? The best games of WoL happened in 2012/2013, so not really. Kas is the only one that does Marine/Tank Flash is one of the most prominant meching players. Who else? Give games, don't just say stuff.
Gumiho, Jjakji, Bbyong all went for Mech this GSL.
Bomber uses bio/tank occasionally. He tried it at least once this GSL (though from behind).
On the flipside we have that one roach/hydra game from DRG.
--> we see much more Mech+bio/tank play than roach/hydra play. (Though when one of them is being opened, this often makes the opponent react with the other.)
And no, I don't think that bio/tank or Mech are strong playstyles either. My point is it's double standards claiming roach/hydra is viable while saying Mech and bio/tank are not. Neither gets played regularily.
|
I don't get why does the mine have to be the 1-hit big splash unit..
Why not make it like underground "turret" or sth, or even maybe something in between..
Why not just "divide" the 1-hit by another consecutive that happen few seconds one-after-another (already posted this)..
I already proposed that the upgraded mine to hold a capacity of 2 charges and keep the nerf of splash anyway.. That way at least the unit will be more "versatile" instead of just intended vs Ling/Bane clumps or Muta stack..
==========================================================
The ways to do it is limitless..
The splash radius doesn't matter vs Protoss, since they have relatively high HP units, but rate-of-fire does matter.. Why don't they experiment with the unit a bit more anyways ?
Noone uses the damn thing in TvP anyways except for drops in the mineral line, and even more stupid is that if the other player just "ignores" it will have much more chances to get less punished instead of "drag the probes" to a place but being like 1 milisecond late at doing it..
Like - even if the WM keeps it's 1-hit slow-recharge mechanic - still - the hit could be more "clustered", like instead one huge rocket thing - hit 3 shrapnel clusters instead at random directions.. Or even keep the 1-rocket, but instead of killing a bunch of low-hp units beside it, make it cluster in 3 smaller shrapnels with a lot less splash radius than the one we have now, but a relatively high-single target damage.. That way - even with the "clustering" mechanic the focusing-micro reward would still remain, cause you could "set" where the initial "impact" will take place..
Like there are tons of ways to make the unit more useful in TvP and less "game-changing" in TvZ.. Like that way you'd see mines hit like 10 banelings at most, or maybe 15-ish, but not 30.. And also it would be able for example to take-out 3 Zealots for a change, or at least severely hurt them..
I mean - if you design a unit to have it's DPS being splash - you severely hurt the Zerg and Bio, and if you make the main DPS source of a unit being it's rate-of-fire - then you hurt the "big-shots" instead..
I don't get it, why does it have to be so much splash-oriented unit as if that was the only DPS source a ground "trap" unit could have..
==========================================================
Like there are Tons and Tons and Tons of ways to make it, that's why test-maps are there after all, aren't they.. ?
Often get the "perception" that the changes never get enough "variant-tested" if you know what i mean ?
I don't get why the unit has to have a "single-role" and be vs Bane/Ling/Muta clumps intended instead of it being more versatile overall.. It's almost as if - Blizzard thinks that Marines aren't good vs "lots of small units" and relatively good vs everything else.. 
So that way the mines need to take care only of those, and therefore provide the Marines to do it's damage after.. Ofc a small note - by Marines I think of carefully-grouped MMM clusters (like even combined - they end up doing the same the Marine would)
==========================================================
Like - I got hugely amazed but also kinda pissed that the exact moment the unit was created it didn't have like any change in the final version and got launched in the game.. From even day1 it was hugely obvious that it won't do anything vs Protoss (except luckily kill a lot of Probes if the other player "risks" to save them) but will just destroy Zerg all over.. A different story is whether the Zerg will know how to "minimize" that.. And in all honesty - that's what I always mostly hate - designed units vs only 1-race..
Not to say what happens after that when people start discussing which is the "hard' race, which is a-move, which is the "master" race, and such things.. Like - 1 too hard and 1 too hard for the opponent matchup - doesn't make a good atmosphere, unless you prefer to "encourage" "uneven" ground or sth..
Now whether you'll be able to drop at 3 places at once, or being able to send 1 linear wave after another with a precise interval of 1.5 sec between them or not and have a higher success is a different matter, shouldn't be the only one option available for success.. Like - those are bonuses..
So yah - the good thing is that it's finally identified that the WM is a problem, just - need to test it more how to fix that
And I don't think it will "dumb-out" the game, but will put more even ground at the ZvT and TvP matchups instead
|
what about removing muta regen but let wms only attack ground?
|
On October 17 2013 22:57 The_best32 wrote:
what about removing muta regen but let wms only attack ground?
then who would use mutas against Protoss or Zerg?
what role would WMs have at all apart from killing banes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
